ABSTRACT
Prefiguration is a core feature of anarchist practices both historically and spatially. Whilst it can be a feature of other hierarchical and oppressive political ideologies, the priority it is given in anarchism distinguishes it from the more peripheral role it plays in the conceptual constellations of, say, liberalism and fascism. This chapter explores some criticisms of prefiguration raised in the works of contemporary theorists like Uri Gordon, Marianne Maeckelbergh, and Luke Yates. They variously propose that prefiguration is conceptually inadequate as it is vague enough as a guiding principle to allow for hierarchical and oppressive activity and it is unclear as to whether it applies to types of organisation or tactic or epistemology. In the chapter, prefiguration is also defended from orthodox Marxist and post-anarchist critics who argue that prefiguration is inadequate or detrimental to a genuinely revolutionary (anti-)politics.
